How exciting the prospects of all of this.

Wow, isn’t it amazing how we’re all concerned about the same thing… Despite the media dismissing us and our concerns as it already moves to an Obama v. McCain race (before we know if he’s even the Dem nominee!)? It was so exciting early on for me to lose myself in the “hope” and the “change”… But over time, I’ve come to see that the Obama “movement” doesn’t know what it’s really hoping for or what change it will really bring about. As you all have already said, Obama rejects much of the traditional Democratic fundamentals like universal health care, Keynesian economics, and the belief that government does have a crucial role in making society work.

That’s what’s scaring me about Obama… That the “movement” he’s created out of the anti-Bush “movement” still doesn’t have a real purpose.

In eight years or so we’ll be offered a serving of the same old shit, disguised as something wonderful, and pushed by the best marketing machine in history. That’s what we need someone to help us get ready for.

My hypothesis is that to defeat Bushco, you need a less reactionary movement that puts forth a simple, explicit positive agenda. The conservative movement was largely successful because they had a very well defined philosophy. It failed miserably. Bill Clinton demonstrated the fallacy of many conservative principles (e.g., taxation and government that works) which is why I find attacks on his presidency counterproductive. He may not have developed a liberal utopia, but he devestatingly showed the fallacy of the conservative movement.

Part of the reason that I have no excitement toward Obama is that underneath it all he is using a subtle “personal responsibility” frame that probably gives Grover Norquist thrills up his legs. The “pox on both your houses” approach deligitamizes government as a whole and that plays into the conservative movement’s mantra. I may be wrong, but that’s how I see it. I’m not given confidence in his SS dogwhistling nor his abandonment of the principle of universal healthcare. (I know you advocate single-payer only, but Obama abandoned the fundamental concept of UHC. Hillary’s approach may not satisfy you, but as a core principle it legitimizes government while Obama delegitimizes it. To obtain the ideal you need to believe in the fundamental concept in the first place.)

I think this is an important discussion and worth hashing out. I look forward to more of your comments on this topic.

Speaking for me only: if the purge succeeds and Obama is the nominee, then, I am no longer in any way connected to the Democratic party since the party decided that people like me had no place in it. If the purge fails and HRC is the nominee, I’m moving on to the GE campaign.

You do what you want. Frankly I don’t care.

Oh, and by the way, the very use of the word “dynasty” to characterize husband and wife, is bullshit. Doesn’t give much credence to your argument.

And I did this not because I was trying to stop one man, but exactly because I was trying to stop exactly what has since transpired. Because what I was trying to stop, and what has to be stopped for anything else to matter, is BUSHCO.

Except for the fact that BUSHCO was able to install Junior in the Presidency, he could, in many ways, properly be considered to be an irrevelancy. BUSHCO rests now because the snake it is has swallowed far more than it ever hoped for in only 8 years, and needs to digest before going back to the hunt.

Likely daddy will have handed over the reins before things get back up to full speed, but not to his figurehead son. There has been succession planning, but that part of BUSHCO has been screened too well for me to put those pieces together yet. However, there will be BUSHCO until BUSHCO is openly targeted and beaten and, until then, it is prepared to do whatever is necessary to keep the future you envision from being pursued.